根據過去文獻顯示，圖書館網站所提供的內容及服務功能性為影響使用者使用意願及滿意度的關鍵，因此，圖書館應滿足使用者對圖書館提供多元服務的期待，並且將焦點放在植基於網路的服務上。有鑑於目前探討大學圖書館網站的研究多偏向可用性議題，或是品質評估的面向；而品質評估又著重於實體圖書館；且國內研究對於大學圖書館網站的內容分析或是服務探討之年代較為久遠，不符現今網路技術趨向。於此，本研究想真正從使用者觀點出發，瞭解大學圖書館網站應提供哪些服務與功能，才能滿足使用者的需求。

本研究針對目前大學圖書館網站在服務與功能的提供情況進行內容分析，並以深度訪談法探求使用者之服務與功能需求，最後再以修改之SERVQUAL量表問卷調查本研究所所提出的服務與功能項目，是否能讓使用者滿意度上升。

研究結果顯示目前國內外大學圖書館網站在圖書館相關資訊的提供情況較佳，而使用者使用大學圖書館網站的主要目的為館藏查詢，並且最希望網站能提供對館藏內容的描述資訊。一般使用者與圖書館專業人士對網站提供服務與功能之看法落差主要為學科資源的建置。整體而言，使用者對現今大學圖書館網站服務與功能總滿意度介於普通至滿意之間，而對於本研究提出之大學圖書館網站服務與功能總滿意度同樣介於普通至滿意之間，但滿意度有所差異且略為提昇，兩者間差異主要來自於與互動性相關的服務與功能。
最後依據研究結果提出下列幾點建議，以供大學圖書館作為參考：1.大學圖書館網站應重視館藏內容描述資訊的提供；2.學科館員制度的建立；3.重視與讀者間的互動；4.進行使用者意見調查。

Literature show that the content and services which library websites provide is the key to affect users＇ will and satisfaction of using, therefore, the libraries should provide multiple services to meet the users＇ expectation, and focus on plant-based network services. In view of the present studies of university library website were focused on usability issues or quality assessments; and quality assessment has focused on the physical library; besides, content analysis or services reviews of the university library websites of domestic researches are outdated, inconsistent with the current trend of network technology. Here, in this study, try to be from of the users＇ point of view to understand what services and features university library websites should provide to meet the users＇ needs.
This research is focus on the content analysis of services and functions provided by university library websites, and try to explore the website functions of users＇ need with the depth interview. Finally, see if the services and functions proposed by this research make users＇ satisfaction increased by modified SERVQUAL scale survey.
The results show that the university library websites have good representation in providing library related information, besides, collection search is the main purpose of using the university library websites, and the most expect feature is to provide the descriptions of the collection. The idea of the subject resources is different between general users and library professionals. Overall, users＇satisfaction of services and functions of their own university library website are between normal and satisfactory, same as the satisfaction of the items proposed by this research, but there＇s a slight increase of latter. The difference mainly comes from the interactive-related services and functions.
Finally, according to the research results, here are several suggestions for the university library as a reference: 1. University library websites should attach importance to the provision of descriptions of collection; 2. Subject librarian system is established; 3. University library websites should attach importance to the interaction between readers.

英文文獻
Abell, A. et al. (2002). Fad or future. Library + information update, 1(7), 30-32.
Casey, M. E., & Savastinuk, L. C. (2006). Library 2.0: Service for the next-generation library. Library Journal . Retrieved October 28, 2008, from http://www.libraryjournal.com/article/CA6365200.html
Casey, M. E., & Savastinuk, L. C. (2007). Library 2.0: A guide to participatory library service. New Jersey: Info Today.
Chad, K., Miller, P. (2005). Do libraries matter: The rise of library 2.0. Retrieved December 02, 2008, from http://www.talis.com/applications/downloads/white_papers/DoLibrariesMatter.pdf
Chao, H. (2002). Assessing the quality of academic libraries on the web: The development and testing of criteria. Library & Information Science Research, 24, 169-194.
Clyde, L. A. (2004). Library weblogs. Library Management, 25(4/5), 183-189.
Cohen, L.B. & Still, J.M. (1999). A comparison of research university and two-year college library web sites: content, functionality, and form. College & Research Libraries, 60(3), 275-289.
Cole, I., Lansdale, M.W., & Christie, B. (1985). Dialogue design guidelines. In B. Christies (Ed.), Human factors of Information Technology in the Office. Chichester, UK: Wiley. In Lansdale, M.W., & Ormerod, T.C. (1994) Understanding interfaces: a handbook of human-computer dialogue. Academic Press, UK.
Detlor, B., & Lewis, V. (2006). Academic library web sites: Current practice and future directions. The Journal of Academic Librarianship, 32(3), 251-258.
Guenther, K. (2000). Preserving the personal touch of library services in a digital world. Computers in Libraries, 20(8), 57.
Hadro, J. (2008). Darien Library's open source SOPAC 2.0 emphasizes patron content. Library Journal. Retrieved December 28, 2008, from http://www.libraryjournal.com/article/CA6591377.html?rssid=191
Heinrichs, J. H., Lim, K.S., Lim, J. S., & Spangenberg, M. A. (2007). Determining factors of academic library web site usage. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 58(14), 2325–2334.
Karami, T., & Oloumi, T. (2006). Libraries and weblogs: The role of new phenomenon Blogs in library services, research and learning. Paper presented at the The 27th Annual Conference : Embedding Libraries in Learning And Research. Retrieved October 28, 2008, from http://www.iatul.org/doclibrary/public/Conf_Proceedings/2006/Karami.ppt
Keiser, B. E. (2001). Tips for enhancing the value of your web site. Online, 25(6), 41-42.
Library Success Wiki (2006). How libraries can use Wikis with their patrons. Retrieved October 31, 2008, from http://www.libsuccess.org/index.php?title=How_Libraries_Can_Use
Maness, J. (2006). Library 2.0 theory: Web 2.0 and its implications for libraries. Retrieved October 28, 2008, from http://www.webology.ir/2006/v3n2/a25.html
OCLC. (2009). Online catalogs: What users and librarians want. Retrieved July 20, 2009, from http://www.oclc.org/reports/onlinecatalogs/fullreport.pdf
Osorio, N. L. (2001). Web sites of Science-Engineering Libraries: An analysis of content and design. Science and Technology Librarianship, 29. Retrieved October 5, 2008, from http://www.library.ucsb.edu/istl/01-winter/refereed.html
Parasuraman, A., Berry, L. L., & Zeithaml, V. A. (1985). A conceptual model of service quality and its implications for future research. Journal of Marketing, 49(4), 41-50.
Parasuraman, A., Zeithaml, V. A. & Berry, L. L. (1988). SERVQUAL: A multiple-item scale for measuring consumer perceptions of service quality. Journal of Retailing, 64(1), 12-40.
Stephens, M. (2006). Web 2.0 & libraries: Best practices for social software. Library Technology Reports, 42(4), 6-66.
Xie, M., Wang, H., & Goh, T. N. (1998). Quality dimensions of internet search engines. Journal of Information Science, 24, 365-372.
Zhou, J. (2003). A history of web portals and their development in libraries. Information Technology and Libraries, 22, 119-128.

中文文獻
卜小蝶（1998）。淺析個人化服務技術的發展趨勢對圖書館的影響。國立成功大學圖書館館刊，2，63-73。
王梅玲（2003）。網路教學帶給大學圖書館的挑戰與機會。圖書與資訊學刊，44，53。
王梅玲（2007）。圖書館網路資訊資源與服務評鑑之趨勢─2007館際合作研討會--東亞現況與趨勢。2009.01.01取自：http://www3.nccu.edu.tw/~meilingw/report/speech/service_web.pdf
中國圖書館學會（2000）。圖書館事業發展白皮書。臺北市：中國圖書館學會。
毛慶禎（2007）。從Web 2.0 到Library 2.0—圖書館2.0 系列報導。全國新書資訊月刊，2，4-7。
吳錦範（2006）。圖書館建構RSS 服務之經驗分享—以國立台東大學圖書館為例。林泰宏、梁鴻栩 （主持人），Web 2.0 與圖書館。Web 2.0 與圖書館學術研討會，淡江大學。
杜毓真、柯皓仁（2006）。部落格在公共圖書館的應用初探。臺北市立圖書館館訊，23（3），35-54。
洪世揚（2001）。理財網站線上服務服務品質之研究─以理財內容網站為例。台灣科技大學企業管理系碩士班碩士論文，未出版，台北市。
陳淑燕（2002）。大學圖書館在網路資訊環境的使用者服務規劃。國立中央圖書館臺灣分館館刊，8（4），6-20。
陳澄瑞（2008）。圖書館網站功能需求與服務研究─以國家圖書館為例。大同大學資訊經營所在職專班碩士論文，未出版，臺北市。
翁慧娟（1999）。我國大學圖書館網站品質評估之研究。臺灣大學圖書資訊學研究所碩士論文，未出版，台北市。
梁鴻栩（2006）。共同創作與分享─如何應用Blog/Wiki在圖書館服務。2008.10.28，取自：http://www.lib.tku.edu.tw/libintro/pub/web20&lib_semina/blog&wiki.pdf
黃明居、簡燕華（2007）。RSS 應用於數位化圖書館專題選粹服務之研究。教育資料與圖書館學，44（3），275-291。
謝寶煖（1997）。我國臺灣地區公共圖書館讀者服務涉入程度之研究。國立交通大學管理科學研究所博士論文，未出版，新竹市。
薛理桂（1998）。圖書館在網際網路提供的讀者服務。圖書與資訊學刊，24 ，35-43。
藍素華（2002）。美國大學圖書館與台大圖書館網站之比較研究。大學圖書館，6（1），119-131。
蘇小鳳（2006）。2.0 世代的數位參考服務。陳光華（主持人），Web 2.0 與圖書館。Web 2.0 與圖書館學術研討會，淡江大學。